20200436 Ver 1_401 Application_20200327

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
SAW — 201 - BEGIN DATE [Received Date]:
Prepare file folder ❑ Assign Action ID Number in ORMFI
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Somerset Park (Cary Parkway)
2. Work Type: Private ❑� Institutional ❑ Government ❑ Commercial ❑
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form 133d and Be]:
The proposed site plan includes mixed use construction of office space and retail space.
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]: Cambridge -Cary, LLC / Mr. Nate Buhler
5. Agent / Consultant [PCN Form A5 — or ORM Consultant ID Number]: Atlas Environmental, Inc
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form 135b]: no known previous Action ID's
7. Project Location - Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form 131b]:
35.74895 N-78.76674 W, US-1 @ SE Cary Parkway. Cary, NC 27518
8. Project Location - Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form 61a]: 0762876687, 0762972830, 0762869948
9. Project Location — County [PCN Form A2b]: Wake
10. Project Location — Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Cary I
�5 � a V
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbod PCN Form 62a : Lynn Branch MAR np
� y [ ] y 2 7 20?.0
/ DENR WATER RESOUR ; Z'
12. Watershed / 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form B2c]: Upper Neuse, 0302OLTU T'SPORTATIONPERMITTING UMT
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404
Regulatory Action Type:
Standard Permit
✓ Nationwide Permit # 39
❑ Regional General Permit #
❑ Jurisdictional Determination Request
❑ Section 10 & 404
❑Pre -Application Request
Unauthorized Activity
❑ Compliance
❑ No Permit Required
Revised 20180124

VIRONMENTAL
March 24, 2020
US Army Corps of Engineers NC Division of Water Resources
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office 401 and Buffer Permitting Unit
Attn: Mr. James Lastinger Attn: Mrs. Karen Higgins
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105 1617 Mail Service Center
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587 Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Re: Summerset Park (Cary Parkway) - - 41 Acres
US-1 @ SE Cary Parkway. Cary, NC 27518
Nationwide Permit Verification 39
James/Karen:
Atlas Environmental, Inc. is submitting the enclosed package on behalf of Cambridge -
Cary, LLC, Mr. Nate Buhler, for approval of a Nationwide Permit 39 application. There
is 247 linear feet of intermittent (Corps) / ephemeral (DWR) stream (CH 200), 525 linear
feet of intermittent (Corps) / intermittent (DWR) stream (CH 200), 2,545 linear feet of
perennial stream (CH 100), and 2.15 acres of wetlands (WL 1000) on the subject
property. The enclosed permit application request is for 247 linear feet of upper
intermittent and 525 linear feet of lower intermittent stream impacts in order facilitate
construction of an office and retail complex, employee parking, visitor parking, road
access around the complex, and three storm water SCM's. This area is very attractive
for office and retail development due to its proximity to US Hwy 1.
The streams on site are Lynn Branch and unnamed tributaries to Lynn Branch which is
classified as a "WS-III, NSW" water by the North Carolina Division of Water Resources.
A jurisdictional determination has been submitted to the Corps. The Corps conducted a
site visit on September 17, 2019. NC DWR conducted a site visit on November 12,
2019. Any springs and seepage along stream 200 will be collected in the culvert
system to ensure that flow to downstream receiving waters continues after the impacts
are constructed.
All perennial stream impacts have been avoided which is 76.7% of the streams on site.
All wetland impacts have been avoided. The fill slopes along CH 200 are the steepest
allowed for local approval. An earlier site plan would have required impacts to 325
linear feet of the perennial reach of CH 2O0. This plan would have reduced significant
costs for construction of retaining walls. These impacts would have required an
Individual Permit application.
Atlas is requesting that this project be allowed to be permitted under a Nationwide
Permit even though intermittent stream impacts exceed 300 linear feet. No perennial
stream impacts are proposed. The upper impacts are to a low -quality intermittent
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road, #411
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
704-512-1206 (o) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atiasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville and Charlotte

it `V
�EN171RONMENTAL
stream. This reach of stream has never had water present during all six site evaluations
over the past year. The lower impacts are to an intermittent stream that is incised with
no floodplain accesses. This reach of stream has only had water present during one
out of six site visits over the past year. The Corps and DWR were in agreeance during
the site meetings of allowing a Nationwide Permit for the project.
Based on conversations and feedback from the City of Cary property development of
multi -family use would not have been approved for zoning or supported by the local
councilman. The Cary 2040 development plan calls for business/industrial development
of which office space is a primary use. The current site plan of three 120,000
square/foot buildings for office space is supported by the local government and is in -line
with future development goals for the area. This property location is the last large tract
of undeveloped land in the area and offers unparalleled access to interstate and
highways for increased convenience. The location and access to the property will allow
for cost effective market absorption and pre -leasing rates consistent with Raleigh -
Durham office markets.
Stream Impact Summary Table
Impact
Channel
Stream
Type
Reach
Length (Ft)
Permit
Mitigation
S1
CH 200
Intermittent
Upper
247
39
none
S2
CH 200
Intermittent
Middle
525
39
1:1
Based on our previous conversations there will no mitigation required for impacts to the
upper reach of CH 200 (S1) which totals 247 linear feet. Mitigation will be required for
the remaining impact, S2, which totals 525 linear feet at a ratio of 1:1. A copy of the
DMS acceptance letter for stream credits is included. No stream credits were available
from any mitigation bank within the HUC. Buffer impacts will also be required for the
construction of a bridge/greenway trail allowing occupants access to the existing
greenway adjacent to the east bank of Lynn Branch. Buffer impacts will total 360
square feet in zone 1 and 240 square feet in zone 2. Greenways are an allowable use
within the Neuse Riparian Rules without mitigation.
Avoidance and minimization have been considered in coordination with the
construction/development requirements for the Town of Cary. The maximum allowable
slope for tying graded areas to existing ground surfaces is 3:1 which is the current
design on the site plan. The Town of Cary also requires a tiered retaining wall around
stormwater ponds which reduces the amount of area for tying back into the existing
ground surfaces. Two extremely long tiered retaining walls are proposed to avoid
additional stream impacts. One tiered retaining wall is 673 linear feet long and the other
is 536 linear feet in length. These walls add significant construction cost in order to
avoid additional stream impacts.
A7LLASEnvironmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road, #411
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
704-512-1206 (o) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville and Charlotte

7IRONMENTAL
Enclosed are the necessary permit verification documents and additional information.
Thank you for your attention to the enclosed request. Please contact me if you need
any additional information.
Best regards,
D6+ dl"
Jennifer L Robertson
[e-mail]
.61YZASEnvironmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road, #411
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
704-512-1206 (o) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville and Charlotte

A"%IRONMENTAL
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
Attn: Mr. Scott McLendon, Chief, Regulatory Division
PO Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
-and-
NC Division of Water Resources, Water Quality Program
Wetlands, Buffers, Streams — Compliance and Permitting Unit
Attn: Mrs. Karen Higgins, Supervisor
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
I, the current landowner, lessee, contract holder to purchase, right to purchase holder, or easement
holder of the property/properties identified below, hereby authorize Atlas Environmental Inc to act on my
behalf as my agent during the processing of permits to impact Wetlands and Waters of the US that are
regulated by the Clean Water Act and the Rivers and Harbors Act. Federal and State agents are
authorized to be on said property when accompanied by Atlas Environmental Inc staff for the purpose of
conducting on -site investigations and issuing a determination associated with Waters of the US subject to
Federal jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors
Act of 1899 and Waters of the State including 404 Wetlands, Isolated Wetlands, and other non-404
Wetlands subject to a permitting program administered by the State of North Carolina. Atlas
Environmental Inc is authorized to provide supplemental information needed for delineation approval
and/or permit processing at the request of the Corps or NC DWR Water Quality Program.
Project Name:
Cary Parkway
Summerwinds Inc and Robert Pleasants
Property Owner of Record:
Contact Name:
Nate Buhler, Cambridge Properties, contract holder
831 E. Morehead Street, Suite 245
Address:
Charlotte, NC 28202
Address:
Phone/Fax Number:
980-260-2770
Email Address:
[e-mail]
Project Address:
853 SE Cary Parkway
Cary, NC 27511
Project Address:
0762876687, 0762972830, 0762869948
Tax PIN:
Signature:
Date:
/ Q
�/! 41
ATLAS Environmental Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amlty Road, #411
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
704-512-1206 (o) / 828-712-9205 (m)
[e-mail]
www,atJasenvi.com

Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 39 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
® Yes
❑ No
1 d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
❑ Yes ® No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ® No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program.
® Yes
❑ No
1 g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes
® No
1 In.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes
® No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Somerset Park (Cary Parkway)
2b.
County:
Wake
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Cary
2d.
Subdivision name:
Not a Subdivision
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
7not DOT project
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Somerwinds Inc and Robert J Pleasants
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
006330/00923, 009395/00450, and 001238/00230
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
N/A
3d.
Street address:
1845 Lake Glen Drive and PO Box 1169
3e.
City, state, zip:
Fuquay Varina, NC 27526-6952 and Wilmington, NC 28402-1169
3f.
Telephone no.:
704-333-2393
3g.
Fax no.:
704-333-2394
3h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent ® Other, specify: Developer
4b. Name:
Nate Buhler
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
Cambridge -Cary, LLC
4d. Street address:
831 E. Morehead Street, Suite 245
4e. City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28202
4f. Telephone no.:
704-333-2393
4g. Fax no.:
704-333-2394
4h. Email address:
[e-mail]
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Jennifer L Robertson
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
Atlas Environmental, Inc.
5c. Street address:
338 S. Sharon Amity Road, #411
5d. City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28211
5e. Telephone no.:
704-512-1206
5f. Fax no.:
n/a
5g. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

B.
Project Information and Prior Project History
1.
Property Identification
1a.
Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
0762972830, 0762869948, 0762876687
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.74895 Longitude: --78.76674
1 c.
Property size:
— 41 acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a.
Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Lynn Branch
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
WS-III, NSW
2c.
River basin:
Upper Neuse, 03020201
3.
Project Description
3a.
Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application: The existing conditions of the review area are mostly forested with a high-tension powerline and easement
bisection the property from generally Northeast to Southwest. The southern portion of the property consists of mostly
evergreen trees and the northern areas are a mixture of hardwoods and evergreens. The review area is bound to the
East by residential development and to the North, West, and South by U.S. Highway 1 and SE Cary Parkway.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 2.15
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 3,317 linear feet
3d.
Explain the purpose of the proposed project: The purpose of the project is for the construction of office space and a few
retail buildings along SE Cary Parkway.
3e.
Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: Heavy equipment will be used for tree
clearing, grubbing, and earth work for the preparation of the ground surface for construction. The project will include the
construction of approximately 11 structures for office and retail locations. The development will include associated
parking, three stormwater control measures, and utilities. No impacts will occur to perennial streams or wetlands.
4.
Jurisdictional Determinations
4a.
Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments:
4b.
If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
®Preliminary El Final
4c.
If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Atlas Environmental staff
Agency/Consultant Company: Atlas Environmental, Inc.
Other:
4d.
If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
The Atlas delineation occurred in March and May 2019. The Corps site visit was on September 17, 2019.
5.
Project History
5a.
Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑ Yes ® No ❑ Unknown
5b.
If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6.
Future Project Plans
6a.
Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ® No
6b.
If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Tem ora T
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
(if known)
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404, 10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W2 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W3 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W4 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W5 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W6 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
2g. Total wetland impacts:
0
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
Stream impact
number -
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial
(PER) or
intermittent
(INT)?
3e.
Type of jurisdiction
(Corps - 404, 10
DWQ — non-404,
other)
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1 P
Fill
UT to Lynn Branch
INT
Corps
2
247
S2 P
Fill
UT to Lynn Branch
INT
Corps
3
525
S3 -
Choose one
-
-
S4 -
Choose one
-
-
S5 -
Choose one
-
-
S6 -
Choose one
-
-
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts:
772
3i. Comments:
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number—
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01 -
Choose one
Choose
02 -
Choose one
Choose
03 -
Choose one
Choose
04 -
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts:
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID
number
5b.
Proposed use or purpose
of pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No
If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
Page 5 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then vo.0 MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.Project is in which protected basin?
® Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
6c.
6d.
6e.
6f.
6g.
Buffer impact
number —
Reason for impact
Buffer
Zone 1
Zone 2
Permanent (P) or
Stream name
mitigation
impact
impact
Temporary (T)
required?
(square
(square
feet)
feet
B1 P
Bridge Along
Greenway
Lynn Branch, CH 100
Yes
360
240
B2 -
Yes/No
B3 -
Yes/No
B4 -
Yes/No
B5 -
Yes/No
B6 -
Yes/No
6h. Total buffer impacts:
360
240
6i. Comments: The bridge crossess Lynn Branch for access to the adjacent greenway. The path and bridge over Lynn Branch
are 6 feet wide.
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Impacts to aquatic resources within the review are have been limited to only the intermittent stream. The development of the
property will not require impacts to wetlands, perennial streams, open water, or any protected Neuse buffers (except for the
small impact for the greenway access trail. Of the total 3,317 linear of feet of stream within the review area total impacts
include 772 liner feet of intermittent channel which is approximately 23% of channel within the review area. The required
impacts will avoid approximately 77% percent of the streams on site.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
In order to further avoid and minimize impacts to aquatic resources two tiered retaining walls are being constructed totaling
approximately 1,209 linear feet. The maximum slopes allowed within Cary (3:1) are being utilized to further avoid additional
stream and wetland impacts.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
® Yes ❑ No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ® Corps
❑ Mitigation bank
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
®Payment to in -lieu fee program
project?
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank: none
Type: Choose one
Quantity none
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Quantity none
Type: Choose one
Quantity none
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

3c. Comments: none
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
® Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
525 linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Warm
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
none square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
none acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
none acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
none acres
4h. Comments: no comments
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
not applicable
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
no comments
6h. Comments: no comments
Page 7 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
la. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
® Yes ❑ No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
® Yes ❑ No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
>24 %
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
® Yes ❑ No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
Three SCM ponds will be constructed to treat stormwater.
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
Town of Cary
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
Local
® Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
® NSW
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
® Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ® No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑ Coastal counties
❑ HQW
4a. Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ ORW
(check all that apply):
❑ Session Law 2006-246
❑ Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
❑ Yes ® No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
® Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
® Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a.
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
❑ Yes ® No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or -State
❑ Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c.
If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes ❑ No
letter.)
Comments:
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a.
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b.
Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes ® No
2c.
If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3.
Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a.
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑ Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
4.
Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a.
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
sanitary sewer
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes ® No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
® Yes ❑ No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Raleigh
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
NC Natural Heritage Program, IPAC, Fish and Wildlife county Map; Self -Certification report
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NOAA
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
NCHPO GIS Service, NC HPO response letter attached
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?
❑ Yes ® No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? Google Earth FEMA_NFHL v 3.2 kmz
Jennifer L Robertson
03/24/2020
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Applicant/Agent's Signature
Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.
Page 10 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

/ lilt k
-
� P09
o`
Impact S2, Permanent
CH 2O0, Intermittent, -525 LF
Impact S1, Permanent s\ 4W
CH 2O0. Intermittent, -247 LF
.—�RETA MINE
\` °4>`\ \� _ II(♦ ALL
INTERMITTENT STREAM- r
-\ LF OF IMPACT FROM_. / i • / START PERENNIAL ST/
RT OF INTERMITTENT- / QQ 204 LFIMPACT FACEOREAMFWALL TO
M TO FACE OF WALL i 3� END OFIN7ERNFRENT STREAM, /
, 0
375 APPROX. 772 LF IMPACT TOTAL
Retaining Walls
NO IMPACTS TO PERENNIAL STREAM \ -'\
r 1 i E(/START WTERWTTENT STREAM
J G, 1 d'//! / / / //i/i//i l / �i
zAl /I/,�/,�, /; % � ; _ ,,�;;-_� ;,TS, � \ Bridge for Greenway
Impact B1, - Zone 1: 360, Zone 2: 240
i
,�( ( � TIERED
/Yhn�1� — _ RETAINING./ 4�
WALL t
-- --3 �I ✓•/,� I L � _— _ � \` � � — ace �� /�\jp ` \��L
TIERED \ \ \ C \ V \
�\\_—RETAININ \I 1 I \ I 1 .-� —WALL
.I1•irk
- -\• \ A'lO � i II Ill Igll t, Ig`� j '� � '�
11
s 1
Stream Impact Summary Table -_
Impact
Channel
Stream Type
I Reach
I Length (ft)
Permi
S_
CH 200
Intermittent
LUpper
247
39
S
CH 200
Intermittent
Middle
1 525
39
Kimley)))Horn
• ( '� a8 C .III!I1 1 �
RIM: 351.
\ \ \\ \N - V IN IN: 342.90 Existing line
RIM.
INVV IN.OUT 344.36
IN3M1=.'
_I
SOMERSET PARK INTERMITTENT STREAM
IMPACTS EXHIBIT
DATE: 3/10/2020
Off site sewer line
evaluated for jurisdictional
waters, none present
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
DELINEATION PERFORMED BY Atlas Z�K50 100 200
ENVIRONMENTAL DATED 10/17/2019 NORTH

24 �-
`I, 'I\7\T `J `I\•� \ T`\ � �- \\�\\ . . �.�, \�\ \\ \\ \\� \I 1 I r
� I\ I I \I
\
\ \ \ \
`\ \ -ffff
! h ;� +� Impact S2 Permanent / �-
v \ /\ ��241 --1��h i I , i I v { 1
I III 'I I� I III 'I III 'I 1 i I 11 ®B CH 200 I
1 T T �i T T IT --1 , L _ 1 Intermittent, 525 LF
/ \ \
/I j I, ,� I I
1,4 � -L LI
16� !�! / 3T T� ,7/ \T T �\IT �-
INTERMITTENT STREAM- START PERENNIAL STREAM / ' ' ♦ I , !) \ \ _
_2S4 LF IMPACT FACE OF WALL TO END OF INTERMITTENT STREAM,!
"APPROX. 772 LF IMPACT TOTAL
WE LF OF IMPACT FROM START OF INTERMITTENT STREAM TO FACE OF WALL '� / / % — _ ^cT� c't-`cam"'— 7 �. �/i / 0 \\\ !
i — ' i�.� �i �'� " — NO IMPACTS TO PERENNIAL STR.EAN�_�// ^`'
' Im
CH 2001 Intermittent, -247 LF
f l l 1 , I I ,,�----__• �'''� =� �_ /' /, / / l / ' \\ `-- — — — — — —
------
_— — _--- '�d
STARTINTERMITTENTSTREAN
_
— \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ I J I — — ITS
/ 1
TIERED RETAINING
Ss-
J / // �k3'NRi17E i;A+
IF
EVEL\ -';t\4\T;�, I K4/
__------J---- ;.�" __ s
SOMERSET PARK INTERMITTENT STREAM
))GRAPHIT
Ki orn IMPACTS EXHIBIT DELINEATION PERFDRMED BY ATLANTIS 1C S3AOLE IN FEE 50
DATE:3110/2020 ENVIRONMENTAL DATED 10/17/2019 NORTH

'
Aquatic Resource Sketch Map
Sketch Map provided for illustrative purposes
and preliminary planning only. Not intended to
be relied upon for exact location, dimension, or
orientation. All findings and assessments are
subject to verification from the Army Corps of
Engineers, NC Division of Water Resources,
and/or other appropriate local authorities. Do not
JX
02
Legend
Review Area
Contours, 2 Ft
Wake Co. Parcels
Streets
Delineation
Intermittent
Perennial
r, ANNE=
Project Name: Cary Parkway (US 1 Hwy)
LA C Location: US-1/Highway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway, Cary, NC 27518
AS
RONMENTAL For: Cambridge Properties, Inc. Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
Date: June 03.2019 Updated: Oct. 17.2019

a _ Resource
.,-
Aquatic
. -r A I * I� � ram- Ltt� ri.. aF• { �, -_ _ 1 � _ � � /:
r
r t�
A
WML
Legend
Review
�yA
ffi ' 11
r
r
z 'a
r
!.
1
-
Area
Streets
Wake Co. Parcels
I
Aerial Imagery
Delineation
Intermittent
• Y ✓ _'
J Y'
* M'
Perennial
w •/-
Wetland
ry 1 .11
r'-WA
..A

Aquatic Resource Sketch Map
Legend
0 Review Area
Wake Co. Parcels
o Streets
-- Contours, 2 Ft
Delineation
Intermittent.
Perennial
Wetland
IRDNMENTAL
Paae 3 of 4
Potential Non -Wetland
CH 300, -173 LF
V' 14
Potential Non -Wetland
CH 100, -1689 LF
Potential Non -Wetland
CH 2O0, -1178 LF
Project Name: Cary Parkway (US 1 Hwy)
Location: US-1/Highway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway, Cary, NC 27518
For: Cambridge Properties, Inc. Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
Coordinates: 35.74895,-78.76674
Potential Wetland
WL 1000, -2.150 Ac.
Potential Non -Wetland
CH 400, -277 LF
0 75 150 225 300 Ft
Date: June 03, 2019 Updated: Oct. 17, 2019

Aquatic Resource Table
US-1/1-lighway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway, Cary, NC 27518
Stream Table
ID
Lat.
Long.
Amount
Type
Units
Authority
CH 100
35.74934
-78.76586
1689
Linear
Feet
404
CH 200
35.74891
-78.76707
1178
Linear
Feet
404
CH 300
35.75077
-78.76684
173
Linear
Feet
404
CH 400
35.75009
-78.76597
277
Linear
Feet
404
Total stream 3317 Linear Feet
Wetland Table
ID
Lat.
Long.
Amount
Type
Units
Authority
WL 1000
35.75048
-78.76646
2.15
Area
Acres
404
Total Wetland
2.1500
Acres
Open Water Table
ID Lat. Long. I Amount Type Units Authority
No Open Water
Total Open water
Date of Delineation: 05/30/2019
Date Created: 06/03/2019
Date Updated: 10/17/2019
0.000 Acres
Paae4of4

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
TIM BAUMGARTNER
Director
Nate Buhler
Cambridge Properties
831 E. Morehead St Suite 245
Charlotte, NC 28202
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
November 20, 2019
Expiration of Acceptance: 5/20/2020
Project: Cary Parkway County: Wake
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is willing to
accept payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as
indicated in the table below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the DMS in -
lieu fee mitigation program will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts.
It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact permitting agencies to determine if payment to the DMS will
be approved. You must also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits, regulations or
authorizations associated with the proposed activity including G.S. § 143-214.11.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not
received a copy of the issued 404 Permitl401 Certification within this time frame, this acceptance will
expire. It is the applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to DMS. Once DMS receives a copy
of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must
be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the in -lieu fee to be paid by an applicant is
calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed on the DMS website.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the DMS, the impacts for which you are
requesting compensatory mitigation credit are summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation
required and assigned to DMS for this impact is determined by permitting agencies and may exceed the
impact amounts shown below.
River Basin
Impact Location
8-di it HUC
Impact Type
Impact Quantity
Neuse
03020201
Warm Stream
772.000
Upon receipt of payment, DMS will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The
mitigation will be performed in accordance with the In -Lieu Fee Program instrument dated July 28, 2010 and
15A NCAC 02B .0295 as applicable. Thank you for your interest in the DMS in -lieu fee mitigation program.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at [phone].
Sincerely,
4"'-W
e�Bent Supervisor
cc: Jennifer Robertson, agent
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
217 W. Jones Street 11652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
919.707.8976

Federal Endangered, Threatened, and Candidate
Species
Report of Findings
October 21, 2019
Cary Parkway (US Highway 1) — +/- 41 Acres
US-1/Highway 64 at SE Cary Parkway
Cary, NC 27518
Prepared For:
Cambridge Properties, Inc.
Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
831 E. Morehead Street, Suite 245
Charlotte, NC 28202
Prepared BY.,
IRONMENTAL
338 S. Sharon Amity Road
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019
1

Table of Contents
1 Introduction................................................................................................................................................3
1.1 Federal Status.....................................................................................................................................3
2 Methods.....................................................................................................................................................4
2.1 Information, Planning and Conservation System...............................................................................4
2.2 NC Natural Heritage Program.............................................................................................................4
3 Results........................................................................................................................................................4
3.1 Information, Planning and Conservation System...............................................................................4
3.2 NC Natural Heritage Program .................................. :.......................................................................... 4
4 Findings.......................................................................................................................................................5
4.1 Red -cockaded Woodpecker...............................................................................................................5
4.2 Michaux's Sumac................................................................................................................................5
4.3 Yellow Lance.........................................................................................................................................5
4.4 Dwarf Wedgemussel.............................................................................................................................5
5 Conclusions.................................................................................................................................................6
5.1 Summary .............................................................................................................................................6
5.2 Permitting...........................................................................................................................................6
5.3 Conclusion..........................................................................................................................................6
AppendixA.........................................................................................................................................................7
IPAC....................................................................................................................................................................7
AppendixB........................................................................................................................................................15
NHPReport.......................................................................................................................................................15
AppendixC........................................................................................................................................................20
Fish And Wildlife County Report......................................................................................................................20
AppendixD.......................................................................................................................................................24
ResourceMaps.................................................................................................................................................24
AppendixE........................................................................................................................................................34
Photographs.....................................................................................................................................................34
AppendixF........................................................................................................................................................36
SpeciesConclusion Table..................................................................................................................................36
ATLASEnvironmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019
2

Federally Listed Endangered, Threatened, and Candidate Species
1 Introduction
At your request, on May 30, 2019 staff from Atlas Environmental, Inc. (Atlas) performed a
pedestrian survey of the Wake County Parcels at the Cary Parkway property to look for federally
listed threatened, endangered, and candidate (TEC) species that could potentially occur on the
property. Prior to the fieldwork, website records were searched for potential known locations of
listed species that have been be mapped within a one -mile radius of the approximate center of
this property. Cary Parkway project is located in both the Cary and Apex Quadrangles within
Wake County, NC. The proposed project would include the construction of a single-family
residential subdivision.
1.1 Federal Status
This status is designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the U.S. National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) in accordance with the U.S. Endangered Species Act of1973, as
amended (ESA). Plants and plant varieties, (including fungi and lichens), animal species and
subspecies, and vertebrate populations are considered for Endangered or Threatened status
according to the criteria established under the ESA. Proposals and determinations to add taxa or
populations to the Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants are published inthe
Federal Register. Additionally, the USFWS and the NMFS periodically publish a Noticeof Review
or Notice of Reclassification in the Federal Register that present an updated list of plant and
animal taxa which are regarded as candidates or proposed for possible addition to the Lists of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Consult the Asheville or Raleigh Ecological
Services Field offices for more information.
An endangered species is a taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion
of its range" (Endangered Species Act, Section 3). A threatened species is a taxon "likely to
become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant
portion of its range" (Endangered Species Act, Section 3). Candidate species are "Taxa for which
the [Fish and Wildlife] Service has on file enough substantial information on biological
vulnerability and threat(s) to support proposals to list them as endangered or threatened.
Proposed rules have not yet been issued because this action is precluded at present by other
listing activity. Development and publication of proposed rules on these taxa are anticipated.
The Service encourages State and other Federal agencies as well as other affected parties to give
consideration to these taxa in environmental planning." (Federal Register, February 28, 1996).
Taxa formerly considered as 'Category 1' are now considered as 'Candidate'.
A federal species of concern is a species under consideration for listing, for which there is
insufficient information to support listing at this time. These species may or may not be listed in
the future, and many of these species were formerly recognized as "C2" candidate species.
"...The Service remains concerned about these species but further biological research and field
study are needed to resolve the conservation status of these taxa. Many species of concern will
be found not to warrant listing, either because they are not threatened or endangered or
because they do not qualify as species under the definition in the [Endangered Species] Act.
Others may be found to be in greater danger of extinction than some present candidate taxa.
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 3

The Service is working with the States and other private and public interests to assess their need
for protection under the Act. Such species are the pool from which future candidates for listing
will be drawn." (Federal Register, February 28, 1996).
2 Methods
2.1 Information, Planning and Conservation System
A record search of the US FWS website was conducted to determine what species are known to
occur within Wake County. The US FWS ME for Wake county shows species that are known to
or are believed to occur within the county boundary. The IPaC (Information, Planning, and
Conservation System) which is a mapping tool was also used to generate a table of threatened,
endangered, or candidate species, and/or designated critical habitat. Species on the IPaC list
include species that may be affected by your project and could include species that exist in
another geographic area. For example, certain fishes or clams may appear on the species list
because a project could cause downstream effects on the species.
2.2 NC Natural Heritage Program
The North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR), North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) GIS database was searched to determine what species or rare
natural communities (element occurrences) are known to occur within a one -mile radius of the
approximate center of the project. A list of the rare, threatened, and endangered species and
communities known to occur within the Lake Wheeler quadrangle was generated for the field
search and is included below from the NCNHP GIS database. This list indicates what species have
been reported to the NCNHP as occurring in the state, each county, and within each quadrangle.
These are not completed listings of what actually exists, as no complete survey of the state has
ever been completed. Information contained in this report concerning the species presented
and discussed therein came from reliable published sources, personal professional knowledge
from the staff members that conducted the field surveys and interviews with the current
property owners during the field surveys at the Cary Parkway project.
3 Results
3.1 Information, Planning and Conservation System
Searches of the US FWS website (www.fws.gov/endangered, www.ecos.fws.gov/ipac) found four
currently listed federally threatened/endangered species and three proposed species in Wake
County that could occur on the property or be impacted downstream. These include: Red -
cockaded Woodpecker (Picoides borealis) a federal endangered bird, Yellow Lance (Elliptio
lanceolate), Atlantic Pietoe (Fusconaia masoni), Dwarf Wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) all
federal threatened/endangered clams, Neuse River Waterdog (Necturus lewisi) a proposed
threatened amphibian, Carolina Madtom (Noturus furiosus) a proposed fish species, and
Michaux's Sumac (Rhus michauxii) a federal endangered flowering plant. No currently designated
critical habitats were documented to exist within the review area.
3.2 NC Natural Heritage Program
A search of the NC website (www.ncnhp.org/web/nhp/database-search) found no elemental
occurrences of currently listed federally threatened or endangered species within the review
area or within a one -mile radius of the review area. No natural areas were documented to exist
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 4

within a one -mile radius of the review area. Two managed areas (Wake County Open Space,
Town of Cary Open Space) have been documented to exist within a one -mile radius of the review
area.
In summary there are currently four federally listed threatened/endangered species documented
to exist within Wake County and having the potential to occur or be affected by the project. The
survey conducted by Atlas staff included all these species to have the potential to occur or have
the potential to be impacted downstream at the project. Maps were generated from NCDENR
NCNHP's GIS database file and illustrate the approximate known locations of rare species or
natural communities (element occurrences) within a one -mile radius of the approximate center
of the project. There are no federal endangered, threatened, or candidate species known to
occur within one mile of the center of the project.
4 Findings
The project location lies along the south side of Hwy 1 in Wake County. The project is within the
Neuse river basin and drains to Lynn Branch. The entire property, mostly forested with a portion
of maintained open area and roadsides were thoroughly searched for the below species:
4.1 Red -cockaded Woodpecker
Red -cockaded Woodpeckers are found in mature pine forest typically 60-120 years old, and
these woodpeckers are known for excavating nesting cavities in living pines. These woodpeckers
typically need 80 or more acres to have cavity clusters. No suitable habitat exists on site.
4.2 Michaux's Sumac
Michaux's sumac grows in sandy or rocky open woods on basic soils. The sumac survives best in
areas where some form of disturbance has provided an open area. Suitable habitat on site
includes roadsides and on the edges of artificially maintained clearings. No Michaux's Sumac was
observed on site.
4.3 Yellow Lance
The Yellow Lance mussels are about 85 mm fully grown and are found in.streams as small as one
meter wide. These mussels prefer clean medium course sandy substrate in the main channel of
streams. There is one perennial stream on site however no permanent stream impacts will occur
to this stream. The existing stream does not provide suitable habitat for the Yellow Lance. No
Yellow Lance was observed on site during the field evaluations.
4.4 Dwarf Wedgemussel
The dwarf wedgemussel prefers stream size small streams less than five meters wide to large
rivers more than 100 meters wide; it is found in a variety of substrate types including clay, sand,
gravel and pebble. The mussel rarely exceeding 45 mm in length and is light brown in color. Due
to the urban habitat and stream fragmentation the existing stream does not provide suitable
habitat for the Dwarf Wedgemussel.
A rLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atiasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019
5

5 Conclusions
5.1 Summary
All federally listed candidate, endangered, and threatened species were surveyed for at the Cary
Parkway project. None of these species were observed and the Cary Parkway project should not
have a negative effect on any of these species.
5.2 Permitting
If impacts to regulated waters or wetlands are required to develop the property, Condition 18 of
Nationwide Permit 29 is applicable as follows:
18. Endangered Species. (a) No activity is authorized under any NWP which is likely to directly or
indirectly jeopardize the continued existence of a threatened or endangered species or a species,
proposed for such designation, as identified under the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), or
which will directly or indirectly destroy or adversely modify the critical habitat of such species.
No activity is authorized under any NWP which "may affect" a listed species or critical habitat,
unless Section 7 consultation addressing the effects of the proposed activity has been
completed.
5.3 Conclusion
This concludes our Cary Parkway project review and report of findings for federal threatened,
endangered, and candidate species. We appreciate the opportunity to provide these services.
Please feel free to call with questions or comments.
Jennifer L Robertson
President
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019

Appendix A
I PAC
A YZAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atiasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019

"MOAN
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To:
Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2019-SLI-1037
Event Code: 04E-N2000-2019-E-02372
Project Name: Cary Parkway
June 13, 2019
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The species list generated pursuant to the information you provided identifies threatened,
endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical
habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and)"or may be affected by
your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to
contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to
federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical
habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(c) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the
Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the EGOS-IPaC websitc at regular intervals during project planning and
implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested
through the ECOS-lPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
Section 7 of the Act requires that all federal agencies (or their designated non-federal
representative), in consultation with the Service, insure that any action federally authorized,
funded, or carried out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any
federally -listed endangered or threatened species. A biological assessment or evaluation may be
prepared to fulfill that requirement and in determining whether additional consultation with the
Service is necessary. In addition to the federally -protected species list, information on the
species' life histories and habitats and information on completing a biological assessment or
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 8

06/1312D19 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02372
evaluation and can be found on our web page at http://www.fws.gov/ralcigh. Please check the
web site often for updated information or changes
If your project contains suitable habitat for any of the federally -listed species known to be
present within the county where your project occurs, the proposed action has the potential to
adversely affect those species. As such, we recommend that surveys be conducted to determine
the species' presence or absence within the project area. The use of North Carolina Natural
Heritage program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys.
If you determine that the proposed action may affect (i.e., likely to adversely affect or not likely
to adversely affect) a federally -protected species, you should notify this office with your
determination, the results of your surveys, survey methodologies, and an analysis of the effects
of the action on listed species, including consideration of direet, indirect, and cumulative effects,
before conducting any activities that might affect the species. If you dctenninc that the proposed
action will have no effect (i.e., no beneficial or adverse, direct or indirect effect) on federally
listed species, then you are not required to contact our office for concurrence (unless an
Environmental Impact Statement is prepared). However, you should maintain a complete record
of the assessment, including steps leading to your determination of effect, the qualified personnel
conducting the assessment, habitat conditions, site photographs, and any other related articles.
Please be aware that bald and golden eagles arc protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.), and projects affecting these species may require
development of an eagle conservation plan (http://www.fws.gov/windcnergy/
cagle_guidanee.html). Additionally, wind energy projects should follow the wind energy
guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/) for minimizing impacts to migratory birds and
bats.
Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including cominunications
towers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at: http:I/
www.fws.gov/inigratorybirds/CunentBirdlssucs/1lazards/towers/towers.htm; http://
www.towcrkill.com; and http://www.fws. ov/migrat=birds/CurrentBirdissucs/flazards/towers/
comtow.html.
Not all Threatened and Endangered Species that occur in North Carolina are subject to section 7
consultation with the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service. Atlantic and shortnosc sturgeon, sea
turtles,when in the water, and certain marine mammals arc under purview of the National Marine
Fisheries Service. If your project occurs in marine, estuarine, or coastal river systems you should
also contact the National Marine Fisheries Service, http://www.mufs.noaa.gov/
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in
the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project
that you submit to our office. If you have any questions or comments, please contact John Ellis
of this office at [e-mail].
ATLASEnvironmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019

06/13/2019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02372
Attachmcnt(s):
■ Official Species List
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 10

0611312019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02372
Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
[phone]
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atiasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 11

06113/2019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02372 2
Project Summary
Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2019-SLI-1037
Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02372
Project Name: Cary Parkway
Project Type: DEVELOPMENT
Project Description: 20190613
Project Location:
Approximate location of the project can be viewed in GoogIc Maps: hims:
www.googic.com/miWs/X�lacc/35.74882194808608N78.76767363580082W
rv.
Counties: Wake, NC
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 12

06113/2019
Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02372
Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 7 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fishcricsl, as USFW S does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Conunerec.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
1. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
Birds
NAME
Red -cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: htips://ecos,fws gov/ecp/species/7614
STATUS
Endangered
Amphibians
NAME _ �__.. STATUS
Neuse River Waterdog Necturus le►visi Proposed
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not Threatened
available.
Species profile: Mips:///�cos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6772
Fishes
NAME _ _ STATUS
Carolina Madtom Nolurus furiosus Proposed
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not Endangered
available.
Species profile: httus://ecos.fws.gov/eep/species/528
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 13

06/1312019 Event Code: 04EN2000-2019-E-02372 4
Clams
NAME STATUS
Atlantic Pigtoe Fuseonaia masoni Proposed
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. Threatened
Species profile: bans://ecos.Avs. o� v/ecpIspecies/5164
Dwarf Wedgemussel Alasmidonta helerodon Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: ht s• rcos.fWs.goN,/ern/,pgcies/784
Yellow Lance Elliptio lanceolata Threatened
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: httgs:Hccos.fu s. og v/c /Bps ecies/4511
Flowering Plants
NAME STATUS
Michaux's Sumac Rhos michauxii Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: hops://ecos.fivs.govlecp6Vcies/5217
Critical habitats
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.
ATLASEnvironmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 14

Appendix B
NHP Report
A YZAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atiasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 15

Niprt Roy Cooper, Governor
NC DEPARTMENT OF
r-� � Su;i Hamilton. Secretary
N in i NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
Witter Clark, Director, Land and Water Stewardship
NCNHDE-9264
June 13, 2019
Jennifer Robertson
Atlas Environmental, Inc.
712 English Tudor Lane
Charlotte, NC 28211
RE: Cary Parkway; 20190613
Dear Jennifer Robertson:
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above,
A query of the NCNHP database indicates that there are records for rare species, important natural
communities, natural areas, and/or conservation/managed areas within the proposed project.
boundary. These results are presented in the attached 'Documented Occurrences' tables and map.
The attached 'Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one -mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report,
If a Federally -listed species is documented within the project area or indicated within .a one -mile
radius of the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) for guidance: Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is -found here:
h os,//vaww_fw .❑ v/offi ..s/Dir c ory/ 'stOffi ...cfm?s at c d _=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission,
Also please note that the NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional
correspondence if a Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Clean Water
Management Trust Fund easement, or an occurrence of a Federally -listed species is documented
near the project area,
if you have questions regarding the information provided in this, letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at rodne .b i I rf�n�dcr.c,joy or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPARTMENT Or NATURAL AND Cl1LTkFPAL RPSC'JR. CES
9 fa,t'E`Y. jotP S smrE; RA' F:4 ft HC �176 3 • ;GS1 MAIL SfRViC,E t"°A:iEIGi i_ r-tC 27699
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 16

Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Intersecting the Project Area
Cary Parkway
Project No- 20190613
June 13, 2019
NCNHDE-9264
Bivalve
No Natural Areas are Documented within the Project Area
Managed Areas Documented Within Project Area
Wake County open Space Wake County: multiple local government Local Government
Town of Cary Open Space Town of Cary Local Government
NOFF: If the proposed project intersects with a conservation/managed area, please contact the landowner directly for additional information. If the project intersects with a Dedicated Nature Preserve
(DNP), Registered Natural Heritage Area (RHA), or FeJarally-isted species, NCNHP staff may provide additional correspondence regarding the project.
Definitfons and an expianaition of status designations ano coxes can bir found at Data query generated on June 112019,, source NCNHP. 02 Apr 2019
Please resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation 8,s now information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2 of 4
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 17

Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Cary Parkway
Project No. 20190613
.tune 13, 2019
NCNHDE-9264
Damselfly Low Rare
Freshwater 7101 Lampsilis radiata Eastern Lampmussel 1993-05.05 E 3-Medium --- Threatened G5 S3
Bivalve
No Natural Areas are Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Areas Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Wake County ©pen Space Wake County: multiple loca government Local Government
Wake County Open Space Wake County Local Government
Town of Cary Open Space Town of Cary Local Government
Wake County Open Space Easement Wake County: multiple local government Local Government
Definitions and an explanation of StatUS designations and codes Can be found at hrrna .^fnenhrlo nan,wnu+n,r nrnlrnnrwnC Ihwln, Data query generated on June 13. 2019: source: NCNHP, 02 Apr 2019
Please rrsubm,t your information request O more than one year elapses N ifore project in,tiat�on as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 3 of 4
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atiasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 18

ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 19

Appendix C
Fish And Wildlife County Report
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 20

Endangered Species, Threatened Species,Federal Species of
Concern, and Candidate Species,
Wake County, North Carolina
Updated: 06-27-2018
Common Name Scientific name Federal Record Status
Status
Vertebrate:
Rald eagle
Haliaeetus leurocephnbis
RGPA
Current
Cape Fear shiner Range by
Notropis mekislocholas
E
Current
Basin
Carolina madtom Range by,
Noturus,jtriosus
ARS
Current
Basin
Neuse River waterdog Range
Necturus lewisi
ARS
Current
by basin
Red -cockaded woodpecker
Picoides borealis
E
Current
Southern hognose snake
Heterodon shnus
ARS
Obscure
Invertebrate:
Atlantic pigtoe Range by Basin
Fusconaia masoni
ARS
Current
Dwarf wedgemussel Range by
Alasmidonta heterodon
E
Current
basin
Green floater
Lasmigona subviridis
ARS
Current
Tar River spinymussel Range
Parvaspina steinstansana
E
Current
by basin
Yellow lance Range by basin
Elliptio lanceolata
T
Current
Vascular Plant:
Bog spicebush
Lindera subcoriacea
ARS
Current
Michaux's sumac
Rhus inichamdi
E
Current
Nonvascular Plant:
Lichen:
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 21

Definitions of Federal Status Codes:
E = endangered. A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range."
T = threatened. A taxon "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or
a significant portion of its range."
C = candidate. A taxon under consideration for official listing for which there is sufficient
information to support listing. (Formerly "C1" candidate species.)
BGPA =Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. See below.
ARS = At Risk Species. Species that are Petitioned, Candidates or Proposed for Listing under the
Endangered Species Act. Consultation under Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA is not required for Candidate
or Proposed species; although a Conference, as described under Section 7(a)(4) of the ESA is
recommended for actions affecting species proposed for listing.
FSC=Federal Species of Concern. FSC is an informal tern. It is not defined in the federal Endangered
Species Act. In North Carolina, the Asheville and Raleigh Field Offices of the US Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) define Federal Species of Concern as those species that appear to be in decline or
otherwise in need of conservation and are under consideration for listing or for which there is
insufficient information to support listing at this time.Subsumed under the term "FSC" are all species
petitioned by outside parties and other selected focal species identified in Service strategic plans,
State Wildlife Action Plans, or Natural Heritage Program Lists.
T(S/A) = threatened due to similarity of appearance. A taxon that is threatened due to similarity of
appearance with another listed species and is listed for its protection. Taxa listed as T(S/A) are not
biologically endangered or threatened and are not subject to Section 7 consultation. See below.
EXP = experimental population. A taxon listed as experimental (either essential or nonessential).
Experimental, nonessential populations of endangered species (e.g., red wolf) are treated as threatened
species on public land, for consultation purposes, and as species proposed for listing on private land.
P = proposed. Taxa proposed for official listing as endangered or threatened will be noted as "PE" or
"PT", respectively.
Bald and Golden Eaule Protection Act (BGPAI:
In the July 9, 2007 Federal Register( 72:37346-37372), the bald eagle was declared recovered, and
removed (de -listed) from the Federal List of Threatened and Endangered wildlife. This delisting took
effect August 8,2007. After delisting, the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (Eagle Act) (16
U.S.C. 668-668d) becomes the primary law protecting bald eagles. The Eagle Act prohibits take of
bald and golden eagles and provides a statutory definition of "take" that includes "disturb". The
USFWS has developed National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines to provide guidance to land
managers, landowners, and others as to how to avoid disturbing bald eagles. For mor information,
visit http://www.fws.gov/mi rg atoivbirds/baldea 1
Threatened due to similarity of amnearance(T(S/Al):
In the November 4, 1997 Federal Register (55822-55825), the northern population of the bog turtle
(from New York south to Maryland) was listed as T (threatened), and the southern population (from
Virginia south to Georgia) was listed as T(S/A) (threatened due to similarity of appearance). The T
(S/A) designation bans the collection and interstate and international commercial trade of bog turtles
from the southern population. The T(S/A) designation has no effect on land management activities by
private landowners in North Carolina, part of the southern population. of the species. In addition to its
official status as T(S/A), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service considers the southern population of the
bog turtle as a Federal species of concern due to habitat loss.
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 22

Definitions of Record Status:
Current - the species has been observed in the county within the last 50 years.
Historic - the species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago.
Obscure - the date and/or location of observation is uncertain.
Incidental/migrant - the species was observed outside of its nomnat range or habitat.
Probable/potential - the species is considered likely to occur in this county based on the proximity of
known records (in adjacent counties), the presence of potentially suitable habitat, or both.
ATLASEnvironmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 23

Appendix D
Resource Maps
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 24

ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 25

O
n
r+
O
a-
N
I�
N
O
N
kD
W
00
Ln
S
dl
0
D
3
iv
� n
n
3
0 V1
3 m
Fro
`n
- N
� O
D �2 7
3 r
<, Vo
�p •A Fi
ALA
3 N
N
O N
r O
O �
3
00
N
ao
v
N
N
O
l!1
3
' fv
Q1
HUC 8 Watersheds
e
d
f
r
B
+ 03030002
` Haw
t
Jj 0302020E
Upper Neuse
Legend a
ter type fir
Q Review Area
Wake County
[� HUC 8 0 1 2 3 Mi
Project Name: Cary Parkway (US 1 Hwy)
Location: US-1/Highway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway, Cary, NC 27518
IRONNENTAL For: Cambridge Properties, Inc. Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
Coordinates: 35.74895,-78,76674 1 Date: May 24, 2019

0
It
O
cr
(D
N
N
O
N
p
N
v
ry
3

v+
r,
CD
M
.1
C4
M
ro
ci
f'o
0
go
Ln
n
ry
Vv
Z
to
m
U
�
_
eg
SL
r
t.7
Z
w
r
Ch
ai
c
E
1O
a
-9
1
n Pt \
5b
Ca °
v
u
'C °
! C
O
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019
28

g
Ln
n
ry
zv
r
m
U
dy
Q
ui
ait
ch
H
M
Q�
IP
_
E
J
C
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 29

Aquatic Resource Sketch Map
pr "m r°P�;n,ngi�ll"Notird Ito
be reared upon for exact location. dimension, or
o All cation s andm assessments re
z'
_ .� ........... . .. .... - -
i • • • a • r -
- - • - -■
bWel to of
subject to verification from t� Army Corps at
t e
Engineers, NC Division of Water Resources,
f
ardVbr other appropriate local awhorities- Do not
t
■
■
reproduce map set except in its entirety.
eitlinger Dr
r.
1:` sod`:
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
Detail 1, P 3
L-egend
�] Review Area
Contours, 2 Ft
Wake Co. Parcels
Streets
Delineation
Intermittent
Perennial ....� ._.,-s�.....,.�, a
Wetland 0 1S0 300 450 600 R
Project Name: Cary Parkway (US 1 Hwy)
Location: US-1/Highway 64 @ 5E Cary Parkway, Cary, NC 27518
IRONNENTAL For: Cambridge Properties, Inc. Attn: Mr. date Buhler
Coordinates: 35.74895,-78.76674 1 ©ate: June 03, 2019 Updated: Oct. 17, 2019

W
0
a
M
N
N
O
N
w
w
00
0
D
3
0
0
a
n
rt �
O �
< tt__
O vl
3 =
-• N
O 00
D =
f
o�
non
=r N
N
r
O
O �
3
co
N
v
r
N
i0
N
O
l71
w
N
m Project Name: Cary Parkway (US 1 Hwy)
r'1 �� Location; US-iJHighway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway, Cary, NC 27518
1RONNENTAL For; Cambridge Properties, Inc. Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
Coordinates: 35-74895, -78.76674 1 Date: )une 03, 2019 Updated: Oct. 17, 2019

Aquatic Resource Sketch Map
Potential Wetland
WL 1000, -2.150 Ac.
Potential Non -Wetland
CH 300, -173 LF
Potential Non -Wetland
Legend ICH 100, -1689 LF
0 Review Area
Wake Co. Parcels Potential Non-Wetland1
Streets C IH 2O0, - 1178 LF
Contours, 2 Ft ,
Delineation � Intermittent
Perennial
® Perenniai
Q Wetland
I
Potential Non -Wetland
CH 400, -277 LF
0 75 150 225 300 Ft
- Project Name: Cary Parkway (US 1 Hwy)
Location: US-1/Highway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway, Cary, NC 27518
ITLAS
1RONWNTAL For: Cambridge Properties, Inc. Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
�__ n _.. Coordinates: 35-74895, -78.76674 Date: June 03, 2019 Updated: Oct. 17, 2019

Aquatic Resource Table
US-1/1-lighway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway, Cary, INC 27519
Stream Table
ID
Lat.
Long.
Amount
Type
Units
Authority
CH 100
35.74934
-78.76586
1699
Linear
Feet
404
CH 200
35,74891
-78,76707
1178
Linear
Feet
404
CH 300
35.75077
-78.76684
173
Linear
Feet
404
CH 400
1 35.75009
1 -78.76597
1 277
1 Linear
Feet
404
Total stream 3317 Linear Feet
Wetland Table
ID
Lat.
Long.
Amount
Type
Units
Authority
WL 1000
35.75048
-78.76646
2.15
Area
Acres
404
Total Wetland 2.1500 Acres
Open Water Table
ID Lat. Long. I Amount Type Units I Authority
No Open Water
Total Open water 0.000 Acres
Date of Delineation: 05/30/2019
Date Created: 06/03/2019
Date Updated: 10/17/2019
Page 4 of 4
A rLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 33

Appendix E
Photographs
A rLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atiasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 34

Non -JD Gully
Typical forested area
CH 100 lower reach
Wetland WL 1000
CH 100 upper reach
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atiasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 35

Appendix F
Species Conclusion Table
A FLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 36

Species Conclusions Table
Proiect Name: Cary Parkway
Date: October 21, 2019
Species / Resource Name Conclusion ESA Section 7/ Eagle Act Determination Notes 1 Documentation
Red -Cockaded Woodpecker
No Suitable Habitat Present
No Effect No mature long leaf pine suitable for habitat'
Neuse River Waterdog
No Suitable Habitat
No Effect Stream size, gradient, and flow not
Present
suitable
Carolina Madtom
No Suitable Habitat
No Effect suitable stream substrate not
Present
present
Atlantic Pigtoe
No Suitable Habitat
No Effect (` Too much silt, substrates are not
Present
clean or proper size
Dwarf Wedgemussel
No Suitable Habitat
No Effect No habitat due to urban runoff and
Present
stream fragmentation. Unstable system
w
Yellow Lance
No Suitable Habitat
No Effect Too much silt, substrates are not
Present
clean or proper size
Michaux's Sumac
Su
Suitable Habitat I
Not Likely to adversely affect No species occurrences observed
`
Species Present
'
tsaia tagie i Unlikely to disturb No Eagle Act Permit Required NIA
nesting Bald Eagles
t
NLEB Suitable habitat May Affect 4(d) rule exemption. Not within "red
Present huc map"
Acknowledgement: I agree that the above information about my proposed project is true. I used all of the provided resources to make an
informed decision about impacts in the immediate and surrounding areas.
Atlas Environmental President
Signature (Title
10-21-2019
Date
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road. Charlotte, North Carolina 28211; 704-512-1206 (m) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville, Charlotte
October 21, 2019 37

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper
Secretary Susi H. Hamilton
December 6, 2019
Jacob Sinclair
Atlas Environmental, Inc.
PO Box 17323
Asheville, NC 28806
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
Re: Develop SE Cary Parkway Residential Subdivision, US 1 /Highway 64 at SE Cary Parkway, Cary,
Wake County, ER 19-3195
Dear Mr. Sinclair:
Thank you for your email of October 21, 2019, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected by
the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579 or
environmental.review&ncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above
referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
,Ramona Bartos, Deputy
State Historic Preservation Officer
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

Legend
Q Review Area
,\
Contours, 2 Ft
1
Wake Co. Parcels
<
o Streets
Delineation
Intermittent
Perennial
Wetland
L AL
1y y
acl of 4
U�
Project Name: Cary Parkway (US I Hwy)
Location: US-1/Highway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway, Cary, NC 27518
For: Cambridge Properties, Inc. Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
Coordinates: 35.74895,-78.76674
;tch Map provided for illustrative purposes
i preliminary planning only. Not intended to
relied upon for exact location, dimension, or
rotation. All findings and assessments are
)ject to verification from the Army Corps of
gineers, NC Division of Water Resources,
f/or other appropriate local authorities. Do not
,roduce map set except in its entirety.
—71
Perennial SAM Form
0 150 300 450 600 �Ft
Date: June 03, 2019 Updated: Oct. 17, 2019

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
user ivianuai version z.i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Cary Parkway 2. Date of evaluation: November 12, 2019
3. Applicant/owner name: Cambridge Properties 4. Assessor name/organization: Atlas Environmental
5. County: Wake 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: Neuse on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Lynn Branch
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.74865,-78.76841
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): 200 Upper 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 247 LF
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 0.25 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 2.5 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ❑Perennial flow ®Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ❑A�-� J ®B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ®Size 1 (< 0.1 mil) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 miz) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑il ®III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
[]Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ®Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
[]Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or
1. Channel Water- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
❑A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
®C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
®A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
❑B Not A
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
®C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B ❑B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
®C ®C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
Water Quality Stressors - assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
01 Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
❑J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather - watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types - assessment reach metric
10a. ❑Yes ❑No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A
Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses
N
[-IF
5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
~ Co
❑G
Submerged aquatic vegetation
❑B
Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent
o CO r
❑H
Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation
6 N
❑I
Sand bottom
❑C
Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees)
r „
❑J
5% vertical bank along the marsh
❑D
5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots
um
❑K
Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
®E
Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate -assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
1 la. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach - whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 - 4096 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 - 256 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Gravel (2 - 64 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Sand (.062 - 2 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Slit/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ® Detritus
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ®Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12. Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ®No Water ❑Other:
12b. ❑Yes ®No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ []Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ []Asian clam (Corbicu/a)
❑ ❑Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicu/a)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/tad poles
❑ ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑C ❑C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water z 6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®C ®C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
®N ON
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
❑A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
❑D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
❑E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
OF None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
❑C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
®D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
❑F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
®A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
❑B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
❑C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ®A ®A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
®E ®E ❑E ❑E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ®A Mature forest
®B ❑B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ❑C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D Maintained shrubs
❑E ❑E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet)
If none of theJollowing stressors occurs on either •bank, check here and skip to Metric 22
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ®A Medium to high stem density
®B ❑B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A ®A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
®B ®B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ❑C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. []Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. ®No Water ❑Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch:
Basin Area is 11.9 acres with 1.6 acres of impervious surface. Impervious percent is approx. 13.3%. The entire reach was dry and full of leaves.
Drill results indicate groundwater is approx. 11 feet below ground surface. Vegetation was observed in channel bottom in various locations.
Fibrous roots present. No hydric soils present. DWR asssessed as ephemeral.

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Cary Parkway Date of Assessment November 12, 2019
Stream Category Pbl Assessor Name/Organization Atlas Environmental
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Intermittent
USACE/
NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
LOW
LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Microtopography
NA
NA
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
LOW
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
LOW
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
OMITTED
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
LOW
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
NA
Overall
LOW
LOW

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
ies user manuai version c. i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Cary Parkway
3. Applicant/owner name: Cambridge Properties
5. County: Wake
7. River basin: Neuse
2. Date of evaluation: November 12, 2019
4. Assessor name/organization: Atlas Environmental
6. Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Lynn Branch
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.74889,-78.76714
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): 200 lower 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 525 LF
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 0.5 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 3 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ❑Perennial flow ®Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) . ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ❑A` % ®B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ®Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 miz) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (z 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters []Water Supply Watershed (❑I [III ®III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ®Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
El Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ®No
1. Channel Water- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
❑A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
®C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
®A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
❑B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
®B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A
Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
®B ®B
Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ❑C
Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
®I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
®J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. ❑Yes ❑No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach)
(skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A
Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses
N
❑F
5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
@
❑G
Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B
Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent
w m
CO❑I
❑H
Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation
8
Sand bottom
❑C
Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees)
L
❑J
5% vertical bank along the marsh
®D
5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots
02
❑K
Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E
Little or no habitat
******************************* *REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate —assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ® Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Detritus
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12. Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ®No Water ❑Other:
12b. ❑Yes ®No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicu/a)
❑ []Crustacean (isopod/amph ipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ []Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/tadpoles
❑ ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
®A ®A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑C ❑C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water z 6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®C ®C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
ON ON
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
❑A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
❑D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
❑E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
OF None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
❑C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
®D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
OF None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
®A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
❑B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
❑C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
®A ®A ®A ®A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ❑E ❑E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ®A Mature forest
❑B ❑B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ❑C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D Maintained shrubs
❑E ❑E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream < 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skiVo Metric 22:
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ®A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A ®A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
®B ®B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ❑C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. []No Water ❑Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch:

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Cary Parkway Date of Assessment November 12, 2019
Stream Category Pb1 Assessor Name/Organization Atlas Environmental
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Intermittent
USACE/
NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Floodplain Access
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
NA
NA
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
OMITTED
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Substrate
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
NA
Overall
HIGH
HIGH

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
nies user manual version z.i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Cary Parkway 2. Date of evaluation: November 12, 2019
3. Applicant/owner name: Cambridge Properties 4. Assessor name/organization: Atlas Environmental
5. County: Wake 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: Neuse on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Lynn Branch
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.74893,-78.76612
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
CH 200 -
9. Site number (show on attached map): Perennial 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 406 LF
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 0.5 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 3 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ❑AL ®B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ®Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>: 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑I []II ®III [:]IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ®Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
El Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ❑No
1. Channel Water- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
®A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
❑B Not A
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
®B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
®B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A
Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
®B ®B
Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ❑C
Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
❑I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
®J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. []Yes []No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach)
(skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A
Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses
W
[:IF
5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
F E
c
❑G
Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B
Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent
`o
❑H
Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation
N
01
Sand bottom
❑C
Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees)
r M
❑J
5% vertical bank along the marsh
®D
5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots
❑K
Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E
Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS**************"*************
11. Bedform and Substrate— assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11 a. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) = > 10-40%, Abundant (A) = > 40-70%, Predominant (P) = > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes []No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12. Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ®No Water ❑Other:
12b. ®Yes ❑No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicu/a)
❑ ❑Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ®Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ®Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
® ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/tadpoles
® ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
❑A ®A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
®B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑C ❑C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water >_ 6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®C ®C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
®N ®N
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
❑A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
®D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
®E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
❑C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
❑D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
®F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
®A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
❑B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
❑C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
®A ®A ®A ®A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ❑E ❑E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ®A Mature forest
❑B ❑B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ❑C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D Maintained shrubs
❑E ❑E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream < 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet)
If none of the following stressors occurs.on either bank, check' here antl'skipao, Metric 22s
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB'
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ®A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A ®A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
®B ®B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ❑C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. ❑No Water ®Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch:

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Cary Parkway Date of Assessment November 12, 2019
Stream Category Pbl Assessor Name/Organization Atlas Environmental
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
MEDIUM
(4) Floodplain Access
MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
NA
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
(4) Channel Stability
MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport
HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
HIGH
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
(3) Substrate
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat
MEDIUM
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
HIGH

ale Dr 0772082821
Parcel Map
87543
0762885258
0762784067
0772075935
0762978914
2074
0762979706
0772
7720
07720
0762869948
0762708852
Legend 0762860841
Review Area
Streets 07628626171/
Wake Co. Parcels 062863565 0762865575
Project Name: Cary Parkway (US 1 Hwy)
Location: US-1/Highway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway, Cary, NC 27518
NMENTAL For: Cambridge Properties, Inc. Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
Date: May 24,J019

Topographic Map
"I
\I
Legend
Q Review Area
o Streets
Wake Co. Parcels
Contours, 2 Ft
2rw-%'�f- 1;3lA
It
Project Name: Cary Parkway (US 1 Hwy)
Location: US-1/Highway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway, Cary, NC 27518
For: Cambridge Properties, Inc. Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
.�
0 200 400 600 ft
Coordinates: 35.74895,-78.76674
Date: May 24, 2019

r
a�
USGS Topographic Map
w
s_
�E
k—�
` nger Dr
�,
It'#.
K
f
00�
d.
.w
d
IN
�. a
e #
,
g
r.
ell
u
_
�N
F
10'
Legend —Paw''
,
-��
® Review Area ....
o Streets W%
Wake Co. Parcels �- ��
b _
USGS Topo 0 200 400 600 ft
. � � � � o ,��.;
aNMENTAL
Project Name: Cary Parkway (US 1 Hwy)
Location: US-1/Highway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway, Cary, NC 27518
For: Cambridge Properties, Inc. Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
Coordinates: 35.74895,-78.76674
Date: May 24, 2019

77,771K.."
USGS Topograp ic UK
0
ONMENTAL
Project Name: Cary Parkway (US I Hwy)
Location: US-1/Highway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway, Cary, NC 27518
For: Cambridge Properties, Inc. Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
Coordinates: 35.74895, -78.76674
Date: May 24, 2019

MOM
3
Y
t
j.
rend
f
Review Area
Y
.a 4
Street
e ,A �• �� N
ANOWake Co. Parcels
�-
c• ,
a
1 200 4009 .11 ft
fl Imageryr
IAL

I I
LA
ar
Legend
Review Area
o Streets
Wake Co. Parcels
NWI
Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
Riverine
NMENTAL
Coors ale
National Wetland Inventory
Project Name: Cary Parkway (US 1 Hwy)
Location: US-1/Highway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway, Cary, NC 27518
For: Cambridge Properties, Inc. Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
0 200 400 600 ft
Coordinates: 35.74895, -78.76674
Date: May 24, 2019

Soil Map —Wake County, North Carolina
701630 701720 701810 701900 701990 702080
Map Scale: 1:3,570 if printed on A portrait (8.S' x 11") sheet.
Meters
N 0 50 100 200 300
Feet USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey
0 150 Soo soo Zone
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey
Map projection: Web Mercator Comer coordinates: WG584 Edge tics: UTM Zone 17N WG584 P Y
Project Name: Cary Parkway (US Highway 1)
L..r)L
Location: US-1/Highway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway Cary, NC 27518
E
R®NMENTAL
For: Cambridge Properties, Inc Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
Coordinates: 35.74895,-78.76674 Date: May 24, 2019

MAP LEGEND
MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Solis
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
0
Soil Map Unit Points
Special
Point Features
o
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
S
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
A.
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
s
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
A
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
i-1-F
Rails
eaa�+
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Wake County, North Carolina
Survey Area Data: Version 17, Sep 10, 2018
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Apr 27, 2014—May
6, 2014
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
Project Name: Cary Parkway (US Highway 1)
C Location: US- 1/Highway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway Cary, NC 27518
�SIRONMENTAL For: Cambridge Properties, Inc Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
Coordinates: 35.74895,-78.76674 1 Date: May 24, 2019

Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol
Map Unit Name
Acres in AOI
Percent of AOI'
CeB
Cecil sandy loam, 2 to 6
4.1 9.9%
percent slopes
CeC
Cecil sandy loam, 6 to 10
percent slopes
9.1 22.0%
CfC
Cecil -Urban land complex, 2 to
0.2
0.5%
10 percent slopes
CIA
7.71
18.6%
Chewacla and Wehadkee
soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes,
frequently flooded
PaD
Pacolet sandy loam, 10 to 15
8.5
20.5%
percent slopes
PaE
Pacolet sandy loam, 15 to 25
10.9
26.3%
percent slopes
PbD
Pacolet-Urban land complex,
10 to 15 percent slopes
0.7
1.8%
Urban land
0.2
0.4%
Ur
Totals for Area of Interest
41.4
100.0%
e�
RONMENTAL
Project Name: Cary Parkway (US Highway 1)
Location: US-1/Highway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway Cary, NC 27518
For: Cambridge Properties, Inc Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
Coordinates: 35.74895,-78.76674 Date: May 24, 2019

WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA — SHEET NUMBER 67
Alet ram '." rt
�7 CO2
Ge W n
` aD Cg82
71
t ,CO2 f g
4 f ;
PD
'-CeF ApQ 1
C2� ~� � Z 8612
0
C� r
,1 •3�`
C
e, 3 cop m _ f
a
fir ` Aa B Cm
Cm
CeD
celpf
F:
F
. 9 �
Project Name: Cary Parkway (US Highway 1)
Location: US- 1/Highway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway Cary, NC 27518
IRONMENTAL. For: Cambridae Properties. Inc Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
Coordinates: 35.74895,-78.76674 Date: May 24, 2019

i?
f �11
E3,190
C
:7
c" _
d 9
Ks
..."
?
-
-
.
'
� v
hM1a ru rd Rd
�
4
Ccaonshlie
Pbco
x.
Z
nons
1 H
-.....
` L.
fk=]5
r
-.
-
VJJr
- _ �-4
Pror�� L catioplllr.k
, 5
Kirk, `11 -
Z� 4
n
*4!
�
I !
0.4mi
.
u
'm y luk;"
_ _ _ Surface Water Classifications: ku
Stream in6�+-
27-43-3
`;r;
r t-rigor
c r,o
G
Stream Name:
Tip • _ _
Lynn Bra ncfr(Meadows
ounap
Creek)(Lochmere Leke)
Club
c Descrrmon-
From source to Swift
i>
.Creek
4l s {
CaaE;sfslca=..on_
WS-111;NSW
LDaia et CJ6Q2_:
August 2, 1992
she
P:ver BsG n:
Neurse
7s
�
A ors^_ does this
More info j
c >b
Cis s_ mean?
u nk
a+
•
Zoom ter
+ll g _,
�T
"L'Frrfr
-
-
c C..re,
i-fin k::k
h
G1aff,
� "i}` Aikir 9d
.
MINIg",lorth Caroline State University, City of Raleigh, Town of Cary, State of North(
Ile—
ti
ONMENTAL
Project Name: Cary Parkway (US 1 Hwy)
Location: US-1/Highway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway, Cary, NC 27518
For: Cambridge Properties, Inc. Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
Coordinates: 35.74895,-78.76674
Date: March 26, 2019

Project Name: Cary Parkway (US 1 Hwy)
Location: US-1/Highway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway, Cary, NC 27518
For: Cambridge Properties, Inc. Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
Coordinates: 35.74895,-78.76674
Date: May 24, 2019

c°°rsda -' National Hydrographic Dataset
Legend
0 Review Area
o Streets
�] Wake Co. Parcels
GIS Streams
GIS Waterbody
yAs
.e.__ ONMENT4L
Project Name: Cary Parkway (US 1 Hwy)
Location: US-1/Highway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway, Cary, NC 27518
For: Cambridge Properties, Inc. Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
0 200 400 600 ft
Coordinates:35.74895,-78.76674
Date: May 24, 2019

a7HeibduingerL"D,
o�
in
to
eF EE
, `1
b
AC
K-Ar
w _ AONMENTAL
Elevationit
•d'
Project Name: Cary Parkway (US 1 Hwy)
Location: US-1/Highway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway, Cary, NC 27518
For: Cambridge Properties, Inc. Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
Coordinates: 35.74895,-78.76674
Date: May 24, 2019

USGS Quadrangles
Green Level Cary
Raleigh West
Legend
Review Area
0 Wake County
Quadrangles
New Hill Apex Lake Wheeler
0 1 2 3Mi
Project Name: Cary Parkway (US 1 Hwy)
- Location: US-1/Highway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway, Cary, NC 27518
r
M. AONMENTAL For: Cambridge Properties, Inc. Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
Coordinates:35.74895,-78.76674
Date: May 24, 2019

River-B Eve
03 300020605
No heast Creek
3 020610
030300020608
White Oak Creek
030300020609
Beaver Creek
Legend 0303000401 02
White Oak Creek
Review Area
0 Wake County
HUC 12
H UC 12 Watersheds
030202010803
Middle Crabtree Creek
030202010801
Upper Crabtree Creek
030202011001
Lake Wheeler -Swift Creek
030202010901-�
UpperMiddle Creek
Project Name: Cary Parkway (US 1 Hwy)
Location: US-1/Highway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway, Cary, NC 27518
rA QNMENTAL For: Cambridge Properties, Inc. Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
Perry
030202010804
Lower Crabtree Creek
030202011101
Walnut Creek
030202011002
ake Benson -Swift Creek 030221
White
03
Mahlers Creek
0 1 2 3Mi
0 202010902
Coordinates:35.74895,-78.76674
Date: May 24, 2019

HUC 8 Watersheds
03030002
Haw
Legend
Review Area
Wake County
0 HUC 8
03030004
Upper Cape Fear
14ONMENTAL
03020201
Upper Neuse
Project Name: Cary Parkway (US 1 Hwy)
Location: US-1/Highway 64 @ SE Cary Parkway, Cary, NC 27518
For: Cambridge Properties, Inc. Attn: Mr. Nate Buhler
0 1 2 3Mi
Coordinates:35.74895,-78.76674
Date: May 24, 2019

NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: May 30, 2019
Parkway r
Project/Site: Lower Cary Park ay
00
Latitude: 35.74876
Evaluator: J Sinclair
County: Wake
Longitude:-78.76670
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other Apex/Cary Quad
Stream is at least intermittent 34.5
if 19 or perennial if 2: 30*
Ephemeral Intermittent Pe nial
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 17
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
R Hvrlrnlnnv (Riihtntal = A_c 1
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C_ Rinlnnv (Riihtntal = a 1
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
`perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:
3
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
0
2
1
0.5
1
1
3
2
3
2
0
0
1
1
0
0

NC DWO Stream identification Form Version 4.11
Date: May 30, 2019
Project/Site:Cary Cary Parkr Chway
uppEvaluator:
Latitude: 35.74878
J Sinclair
County: Wake
Longitude:-78.76808
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other Apex/Cary Quad
Stream is at least intermittent 23.5
if Z 19 or perennial if z 30"
Ephemeral IntePrr,��ittent Perennial
7/
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 11
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a_ Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
1 0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
R Hvrtrnlnnv .(Suhtntal = 7_r, )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
r .. Rinlnnv (Ri jhtntal = c
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1 _
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
0.5
1
1
3
1
2
1
0
0
0.5
0.5
0
0

NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 06/30/2019
Cary Parkway
Project/Site:CH too, 300, 400
8
Latitude: 35.74 95
Evaluator: J Sinclair A Baggarley
county: Wake
Longitude:-78.76674
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other Cary, Apex
Stream is at least intermittent 47
if z 19 or perennial if >_ 30"
Ephemeral Intermittent Pe vial
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 23.5
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
,a* Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
R Hvdrnlnnv (SiihtntA = 1n_C 1
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C_ Rinlnav (Suhtntal = 1Z
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch: All three stream were very similar and were perennial.
C'
2
2
2
3
2
1
1
1.5
3
3
1
1
1
1.5
3
3
3
2
0
1.5
1.5
1.5
0.5
0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority. AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Cary Parkway City/County: Wake County Sampling Date: 05/30/2019
Applicant/Owner: Cambridge Properties, Inc. State: NC Sampling Point: Upland
Investigator(s): Jacob Sinclair/Austin Baggarley/Jennifer Robertson Section, Township, Range: Cary
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Terrance Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.75040 Long:-78.76695 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Pacolet NWI classification: None
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
wetter than normal
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reauired: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_Surface Water (Al)
_True Aquatic Plants (B14)
_Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2)
—Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
_Saturation (A3)
_Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_Sediment Deposits (62)
_Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_Drift Deposits (133)
_Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134)
—Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
—Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):.
Saturation Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: Upland
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Liriodendron tulipifera
30
Yes
FACU
Number of Dominant Species
2.
Pinus thunbergii
20
Yes
UPL
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
3.
Quercus rubra
25
Yes
FACU
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Liquidambar styraciflua
5
No
FAC
Species Across All Strata: 11 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 27.3% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
80
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
40
20% of total cover:
16
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
1.
Acer rubrum
5
Yes
FAC
FAC species 20 x 3 = 60
2.
Ligustrum sinense
10
Yes
FACU
FACU species 80 x 4 = 320
3.
Liriodendron tulipifera
5
Yes
FACU
UPL species 25 x 5 = 125
4.
Column Totals: 125 (A) 505 (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 4.04
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
20
=Total Cover
_
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
10
20% of total cover:
4
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
Polystichum acrostichoides
5
Yes
FACU
'indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2.
Brachyelytrum aristosum
5
Yes
UPL
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3.
4•
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
9.
m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
10
=Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
5
20% of total cover:
2
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
Smilax rotundifolia
5
Yes
FAC
2.
Toxicodendron radicans
5
Yes
FAC
3.
Lonicera japonica
5
Yes
FACU
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
15
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
8
20% of total cover:
3
Present? Yes No X
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: Upland
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
1-18 10YR 414 100 Mucky Loam/Clay
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_ Histosol (Al) _ Polyvalue Below Surface (38) (MLRA 147, 148) _ 2 cm Muck (All 0) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2) —Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) —Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3) —Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136) (MLRA 147, 148)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) —Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
—Stratified Layers (A5) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) _ Redox Dark Surface (F6) —Red Parent Material (F21)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) (outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Thick Dark Surface (Al 2) _ Redox Depressions (F8) _Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) _ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N, —Other (Explain in Remarks)
_Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) MLRA 136)
—Sandy Redox (S5) _ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_Stripped Matrix (S6) —Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface (S7) Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Cary Parkway City/County: Wake County Sampling Date: 05/30/2019
Applicant/Owner: Cambridge Properties, Inc. State: NC Sampling Point: WL 1000
Investigator(s): Jacob Sinclair/Austin Baggarley/Jennifer Robertson Section, Township, Range: Cary
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Flood plain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): .5
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.75028 Long:-78.76656 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Chewacla NWI classification: None
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
wetter than normal
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
X Surface Water (Al)
_True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
X High Water Table (A2)
—Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
X Drainage Patterns (1310)
X Saturation (A3)
X Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
—Water Marks (131)
—Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (132)
—Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
X Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133)
_Thin Muck Surface (C7)
=Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (64)
—Other (Explain in Remarks)
—Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
X Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
_Shallow Aquitard (D3)
X Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
X FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes X
No Depth (inches): 4
Water Table Present? Yes X
No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes X
No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
includes capillary fringe
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WL 1000
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Acerrubrum
15
Yes
FAC
Number of Dominant Species
2.
Liquidambar styraciflua
30
Yes
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 8 (A)
3.
Platanus occidentalis
15
Yes
FACW
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
5•
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
60
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
30 20% of total cover:
12
OBL species 2 x 1 = 2
Saolino/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 31 x 2 = 62
1.
Acer rubrum
5
Yes
FAC
FAC species 127 x 3 = 381
2.
Liquidambar styraciflua
5
Yes
FAC
FACU species 0 x 4 = 0
3.
Platanus occidentalis
2
No
FACW
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
4.
Fraxinus pennsylvan/ca
2
No
FACW
Column Totals: 160 (A) 445 (B)
5,
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.78
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
X 3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
14
=Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
7 20% of total cover:
3
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
Sagittaria sp.
2
No
OBL
'indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2.
Woodwardia areolata
5
No
FACW
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3. Microstegium vimineum 65 Yes FAC
4.
Juncus effusus
5
No
FACW
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
Boehmeria cylindrica
2
No
FACW
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6.
height.
7.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
9.
m) tall.
10.
Herb -All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
79
=Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
40 20% of total cover:
16
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
Smilax rotundifolia
5
Yes
FAC
2.
Toxicodendron radicans
2
Yes
FAC
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
7
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
4 20% of total cover:
2
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WL 1000
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture
Remarks
1-2 10YR 4/2 100
Mucky Loam/Clay
2-18 10YR 6/1 90
10YR 6/6 10 C PL Sandy
Prominent redox concentrations
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
—Black Histic (A3)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
X Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_
Dark Surface (Al 2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
—Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
_Thick
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
—Other (Explain in Remarks)
Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
—Sandy
X Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
X Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface (S7)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil
Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0